VANCOUVER REGIONAL FREENET ASSOCIATION
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
MINUTES OF MEETINGS
JANUARY 8, 1994
Vancouver Public Library
The meeting was called to order at 9:30 am.
Present: Margaret Coates, Steven Chan, Susan Pendakur, Jacqueline Van Dyk,
Guy Thomas, Brian Campbell, Tom Hansen, Phil Lyons, Fritz Radandt,
Eric Yung, Rob Clift, Greg Buss.
Note: This was a full-day workshop and was not convened as an official
meeting of the Board of Directors and as such no motions were passed
in this section. A very brief meeting was called later in the day
and the minutes of that meeting are kept separately.
Brian chairs:
* Brian talked about the agenda that was setup.
* Fritz asked about clarification of policies that have been passed.
* Steven suggested we combine reviews of existing functionality, mission
statements etc.
* Margaret suggested that tasks and committments be the final topic
* Susan suggested adding memberships to the agenda, Margaret suggested
volunteers on the agenda.
* Brian opens discussion to the floor about "Key-Issues"
* Fritz stated that Freenet works well when a small number (5,000-10,000)
but what is our target - a small niche market or the public-at-large?
* Rob suggested that we not duplicate existing commerical efforts - that
we work on the "who" of the IP side and those not able to come online
themselves
* Tom reminded us that we passed policy on not paying for info and that
info that is currently being charged for access can be duped n our system
if our resources permit - commerical entities undercut or piggy-back
Freenets, why can't we do the same? - suggest selling servcies for money
as well, like advertising etc. and we may need the funds from these to
expand
* Greg stated that the time for Freenet's isn't past yet - and he's leery
of Tom's idea.
* Fritz: are we to be dedicated to local services or a gateway to the
internet? Who are we serving, the IP's or the public?
* some concern was voiced on recent articles discussing whether the time
for the Freenet concept was past, and our reactions to this.
* Brian: we are moving ahead and we are not assuming that the time for
Freenet's are past. We are social service orientation, just like the
Salvation Army Xmas dinners, but that the global trends are antithetical
to Freents. In dealing with Fritz's question, Brian worried that if we
only deal with community information, we would find ourselves in smaller
and smaller niches.
* Rob suggested that there were 4 outcomes from today: we offer the
info and the access, we offer the info, and don't worry about access,
we act as advocates - without either info or access, or we "close shop".
Suggestion that we act as communication services like the little local
phone companies of the past, or the mental health services.
* Margaret stated that non-profits are booming and we will inevitably fill in
the gaps.
* Guy suggested the idea of an info cooperative - where it's members only for
a nominal fee.
* Susan asked what our target was - who are we providing it for?
* Mike: Expecting that the "big people" will take us over is too fatalistic
Margaret then asked why Mike was involved, to which he answered that he's
from a mixed computer background and feels there needs to be a place
for community computing and access to computing.
* Fritz reminded us that we are trying to do something that is not previously
done.
* Margaret: Our major difficulty is sustainability.
* Steven: Freenet is a transitional system
* Mike reminded us of the Bitnet past history, and its current advocacy role.
* Tom: our original purpose is still sound, but we have a lack of resources
* Brian, Guy: We are the telecommunication resource for non-profits - the
"BC Systems for nonprofits"
* Jacqueline: How do we negotiate with governments?
* Brian: In his meeting with BC Systems, he feels that BC Systems wants
us to be their community front-end.
* Fritz: Victoria was credible due to being online for a year - mentioned
Canucks fundraising possibilities
* Brian, Greg: We may have commercial sponsorship of specific databases,
but we want money with "no-strings" attached for generic purposes, not
specific projects.
* Brian: Ottawa is getting its funding from the Federal and Ontario governments.
* Rob suggested a parallel, for-profit organization to Freenet - brought
up Travel Cuts and the Canadian Federation for Students.
* Brian: so far, no changes have been raised, and he presumes that the
status quo is acceptable.
* Steven, Greg: what is our relationship with non-profits - we should be
open to it.
* Phil: we need to establish a 2-line funding policy for any non-profit
that wants to connect with us
* Guy, Greg: we need more than just cost-recovery with non-profits.
* Rob: some organization may want it, but can't afford it.
* Brian: we should explort the possibility of providing services to non-profits
for communications within their own organization.
* Guy: when do we turn discussions into policy
* Jacqueline: government organizations providing info - they won't make
an offer for $$ until we're online - how do we deal with this?
* Rob suggested we deal with government agencies in terms of them going to
other services
* Phil reminded us of deals with MindLink and DeepCove.
* Brian: most organizations won't move until we setup.
Equality and Participation (Margaret chairs)
* Margaret: based on Jacqueline's letter, we want to discuss participation
communication, roles and regulations. It seemed that communications
were the key issue.
* Greg: we need to focus on the gender issue.
* Phil: it's not a gender issue, it's an issue of power and info and attitudes
* Jacqueline: largest concern is that voices aren't being heard and
volunteers not being able to participate. Not just a gender issue -
non-UNIX guru-problem. Also reminded us that volunteers aren't in the
mission statement. Distributed "For Discussion" paper with ideas/
discussion items.
* Phil: approves of the "User Support/Training committee" and a help line
might be a good idea.
* Rob: we have large #'s of PC people without any direction. we need to make
the effort of gender equality due to male-dominated field.
System design - how do we put new life in it - we may redefine mandate
for HW/SW/System design
* Guy: training committee exists in the Community Content group
* Brian: HW/SW - training of people? - resoureces are not available.
Specialists and Board members and normal people need to communicate on a
common level.
* Guy: communication problem - UNIX is being held up as "the unknown".
* Rob: although training is not part of our mandate, there are opportunities
to learn in all volunteer organizations - evaluation of volunteer skills.
* Phil: "other" steep learning curve is not individuals, but groups.
Political organizations share information.
* Brian reminded us that other skills that aren't technical are equally
important.
* Mike: there was a note in bc.general in August asking for volunteers -
this was very specific to UNIX people due to need for skill sets. He
doesn't know how to reconcile small groups with skills needing to work
a tight timeframe vs. large groups of people, some that need training.
* Rob suggested volunteer organization sessions (there are 3 "holes" where
volunteers can be lost right now)
* Tom: agreed with Mike that this has been a task-oriented job in setting
up system (limited # of people with skills for tasks)
* Mike: organization needed to bring in more people may be prohibitive.
* Fritz: organizational bureaucracy created to handle large #'s of users
and thus our problems may be "growing pains".
* Susan: need to be aware of what's going on - that's the problem with the
task oriented view. Need to work on equal access.
* Brian: we need to be more critical and much "harder" on ourselves. At
present levels of committment, we may never get Freenet online.
* Margaret: we need to decide whether we are using good process.
* Mike: Jacqueline's recommendations are worthwhile. Technical services and
computer support are a good division - users support/training is good for
the technical writers.
* Tom: identify tasks and assign people and communications this afternoon
for launch.
* Brian: Jacqueline's first point (Actively recruiting women) - don't know
how we can approach this.
* Phil: a lot of our IPs and users are going to oriented with large #'s of
women online - recruit more women from public sectors.
* Margaret: we need not have computer expertise, but they must be interested
in info technology.
* Eric: we need more information on women's groups.
* Fritz: Freenet is a discussion forum and gender issues are one more issue.
* Phil: we may need to address equal access
* Eric: stats of male/female in membership?
* Fritz: there may be confusion in certain tasks.
* Brian: we need to focus this afternoon. Our responsibility is getting
Freenet online. We need to ask about followup of tasks.
Adjourn for lunch.
Afternoon session: Brian chairs
Considered official meeting of the Board of Directors and convened as such.
Motions are noted below and voting is also recorded.
Mission Statement/Constitution and Bylaws:
* no changes suggested, although Steven suggested that (h) and (i) might
be renumbered to (a) and (b).
Timeline:
* focus on getting setup. Brian: we should target the beginning of Information
Right's week (April 11th).
MOTION: Tom/Greg: That we start with the committees and work towards a date.
unanimous vote.